Tesla is arguing that it is being blocked access to a new program in New York that would result in lower electricity rates for electric vehicle charging stations due to a discriminatory approach to charging standards.
The cost of operating DC fast-charging stations, like Tesla’s Supercharger, can be quite expensive in markets with high electricity rates or with high demand charges.
The New York Public Service Commission (NYPSC) decided to address that by creating favorable electricity rates for charging station operators in order to promote the deployment of electric vehicle infrastructure.
Instead of making those rates available to all fast-charging station operators as part of the program, the NYPSC specified that the cheaper rates would only apply to charging stations equipped CCS and CHAdeMO plugs.
In Europe, Tesla started using the CCS plug, but the company is still using its own proprietary plug in the US.
Tesla has now filed a petition with NYPSC:
“Tesla respectfully urges the Commission to refrain from discriminating against Tesla and undermining New York’s ability to achieve its ZEV and GHG reduction targets, by reversing the Order and remanding it.”
In the filing, Tesla argues that the commission somewhat inexplicably changed the definition of the eligible charging stations.
The automaker argues that its vehicle sales last year comprised 80% of the DC fast-charging EVs sold in the state and therefore, they need Tesla vehicles to achieve their ZEV goals.
Tesla also discusses ways to get around the current restriction of the new program:
“The Commission states in its Order that Tesla will become eligible for the per plug incentive when chargers are “coupled with plug types that enables use by EVs with Asian and European charging systems,” but footnote 29 adds it is not prescribing which charging technology Tesla should deploy (i.e., CHAdeMO versus SAE CCS).42 However, the Commission is prescribing that Tesla deploy another technology other than its own. Doing so imposes an unreasonable burden on Tesla. To qualify, Tesla would be required to either create an entirely new business segment at a significant cost that can service, manage and bill drivers of other OEMs, or would require Tesla to find willing partners to co-develop sites. While Tesla has worked with other network operators to co-locate stations, opportunities are likely limited for this program. Some operators are interested in locating chargers at existing Tesla stations. In those circumstances, the other operators’ chargers would be eligible for the incentive because they are new stations, but Tesla’s chargers would be ineligible because they are existing stations.”
Due to those issues, Tesla is instead arguing that the reverse the order to allow them to get access to the preferred rates with their own charging stations.
Here’s Tesla’s entire petition about the situation:
[scribd id=401219598 key=key-k2JajQDy8G8z4LvYuXSr mode=scroll]
This is a no-brainer. If your goal is to encourage the deployment of charging infrastructure, Tesla should be a part of that.
No other company has been doing it more consistently than them and it looks like they could be expanding again with the launch of Supercharger V3 today.
It would be weird to give third-party operators preferred rates while excluding Tesla.
What do you think? Let us know in the comment section below.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.